Hifi Magazines now promoting Quad!

[Scottmoose]

Nobody's used this section for a while, so here's a new one. I've mentioned them before in a copule of my posts, but recently (the past 3 - 4 moths issues to be more precise) the UK hifi magazine Hifi World & Computer Audio has been extolling the joys of quadraphonics. And no, I'm not joking, and no, they weren't either. The editor in particular (a renowned vinyl freak) was sent into rhapsodies over Alan Parson's DSOTM mix, rating it, in terms of musical communication and emotion a considerable distance ahead of JG's 5.1 SACD mix. :banana:
Now that's impressive for a popular hifi mag, but he didn't stop there. Because his next call was for modern phono stage designers to start building updated '70's equipment, using modern materials, and for new quad decoders so that vinyl lover's can matrix 4 channel from their stereo LPs. Meanwhile we have other writers in the magazine championing the cause of multichannel by suggesting that stereo LP should be recorded onto DVD-A -but not before being passed through a prologic 2 decoder so it's recorded into 5.1! :51banana:

Things are looking up! :banana:
Scott (the now not so anti hifi mag person)

 

[Obbop]

Ohhhhh if only a manufacturer could beg borrow steal or buy the Vario-Matrix technology and produce a line of modern decoders for those of us whose primary audio delights come from synthesizing a quad-type sound from stereo sources.

It would be marvellous to have a pure 70s Vario-Matrix circuit AND some other modern updated modes to experiment with.

Of course... pricing in the high hundreds of dollars would repel many. Can't today's technology allow a lower cost?

 

[Scottmoose]

Ohhhhh if only a manufacturer could beg borrow steal or buy the Vario-Matrix technology and produce a line of modern decoders for those of us whose primary audio delights come from synthesizing a quad-type sound from stereo sources.

It would be marvellous to have a pure 70s Vario-Matrix circuit AND some other modern updated modes to experiment with.

Of course... pricing in the high hundreds of dollars would repel many. Can't today's technology allow a lower cost?

Let's hope so. There's no reason why it shouldn't -we've got the hardware capability -let's push for it.
Scott